Table of contents

CHAPTER I

THE FOUNDER

That Rahere was the founder of the Priory of St. Bartholomew,
Smithfield, there can be no doubt. The Book of the Foundation,
already referred to and here quoted at length, proves it. King John,
in his charter of the year 1204, (fn. 1) speaks of 'Rahere the first prior of
the aforesaid church who founded it'; and King Henry III in his
charter of the year 1227 repeats the statement.

Various legends exist as to Rahere having been the king's jester
and a great musician, but we have no documentary evidence whatever of these statements. His name is not even mentioned by any
of the contemporary historians, such as Herry of Huntingdon or
William of Malmesbury.

A Raherius or Ragerius is mentioned by Dugdale, (fn. 2) Le Neve, (fn. 3) and
Newcourt, (fn. 4) as holding the prebend of Chamberlain Wood at St. Paul's,
and it is a fair assumption that this is the same man as our founder,
because to Ralph Gundrum, the prebendary mentioned immediately
before him in the list by these authors, is assigned the dates 1104
and 1115; and the holder immediately following Raherius, Geoffrey
'Constabularius', though no date of his appointment is given, was
witness to a grant in the year 1145. As Rahere died A.D. 1143, the
chronology is in favour of the assumption that he held the prebend
from about 1115 to 1143. Unfortunately none of the above authors
give their authority for saying that the prebend was held by 'Raherius',
though for Ralph Gundrum and Geoffrey 'Constabularius' they refer
to the register of the Dean and Chapter. If this Raherius is our
Rahere, and if he held the prebend before his 'conversion', which
must have taken place about the year 1120, then he would have
been brought up as a clerk in holy orders, which is what we should
be led to suppose by his subsequent life. His biographer in the
Book of the Foundation is silent on the point, but the fact of his
frequenting the gay court of Henry I is no argument against the
supposition that he was a cleric, though a gay one. (fn. 5)

His biographer in the Book of the Foundation (fn. 6) gives us the following account of the life he led before his conversion :

'This man, sprung of humble lineage, when he reached the flower
of youth began to haunt the household of nobles and the palaces
of princes. "Sewing pillows upon all elbows," (fn. 7) he drew to friendship with himself those whom he had soothed with jokes and
flatterings. And, not content with this, he approached the king's
palace with some frequency and resorted to the tumults of that
tumultuous court, and with jocular flattery desired to attract to
himself with ease the hearts of many. There he made it his business
all day long to attend spectacles, banquets, jests and the rest of
the trifles of the court; and, with shameless face, betaking himself
to the suite, now of the king, now of the nobles, he assiduously
employed a complaisance that should please them and obtained
with greater ease anything that it pleased him to seek. By these
means he was well known to, intimate with, and a comrade of the
king and of the great men of the court.'

Sir Norman Moore tells us that the name 'Rahere' is probably
Frankish; that it certainly occurs in early French charters in
France, and that the word 'Rayer', used in the middle English translation in the Book of the Foundation, is not so correct as Rahere,
because the Latin of Rayer would be Raierus and the founder describes
himself as Raherus in his own charter of 1137 (pl. VI b, p. 78), and
the same word is also employed in the royal charters; for this reason
the Latin word Raherus is translated Rahere in the new translation
here used. The name appears variously spelt in the twelfth century :
thus we have Johannes Raher in the 'Chronicles of the reign of
King Stephen' (fn. 8) and Thomas Raiher in the Charter Rolls. (fn. 9) The name
Rayer of Holcombe still occurs in Burke's Landed Gentry.

We cannot agree, as suggested by W. Chappell, (fn. 10) that the UUluricus
(or Ulric) Rahere in the Peterborough MS. of Hereward the Wake
is our founder. That outlaw plundered Peterborough in 1070 and on
his return was joined by four doughty followers, of whom Ulric
Rahere was one. Rahere was a nickname and meant, says the MS.,
the 'Heron id est Ardea'. The nickname was acquired when some
Normans, who were taking four brothers to the gallows at Wrokesham
Bridge, mocked this Ulric, calling him a heron, whereupon he seems
to have killed several of the executioners and liberated their prisoners.
Our founder, whether a cleric or not, was certainly a courtier from
his youth and we cannot conceive him to have been a wild Anglo
Saxon outlaw. The dates also are against this theory, for the event
at Peterborough must have happened in 1070 or 1071, which would
have made our founder between 90 and 100 years of age at the time
of his death in 1143; but his biographer makes no mention of extreme
old age, as he does of Rahere's successor Thomas.

Rahere is described by Stow and others as the king's minstrel or
jester, for which there is no other authority than the above passage
from the Book of the Foundation; but it has been pointed out that
minstrels were also reciters of poems, story-tellers, and sometimes
jugglers and buffoons, as well as performers on musical instruments, (fn. 11)
so that Stow may not be far wide of the truth. Rahere's renown as
a minstrel had, long before Stow's time, grown to a fabulous extent,
as is shown by the following passage from Thomas of Reading: (fn. 12)

'At that time there lived in London a musician of great reputation named Reior who kept his servants in such costly garments
that they might seem to come before any prince. Their coats were
all of one color, and it is said that afterwards the nobilities of the
land, noting it for seemly sight, used in like manner to keep their
men all in one livery. This Reior was the most skilfullest musician
that lived at that time, whose wealth was very great, so that all
the instruments whereon his servants plaid, were richly garnished
with studs of silver, and some were gold. The bowes belonging
to their violins were all likewise of pure silver. He was also for
his wisdom called to great office in the city, who also builded at
his own cost the Priory and Hospital of St. Bartholomew in Smithfield. His servants being the best consorts in the city were by
Tom Done appointed to play before the young princes.'

Rahere's chronicler, in the Book of the Foundation, (fn. 13) thus speaks
of his conversion :

'This kind of life he had chosen at first and thus he had spent
his youth. But God, who beholds and pities all men, who cast out
seven devils from Mary Magdalene, who gave the keys of the
Kingdom of Heaven to a fisherman, mercifully converted this man
also from the error of his ways and added to him when converted
many gifts of virtue : "since God hath chosen the weak things of
the world to confound the strong".' (fn. 14)

What was the immediate cause of Rahere's conversion we shall
never know, as his biographer is silent on the point. It may have
been the example of the Queen Matilda, who was herself always
intent on good works. She had been educated at the abbeys of
Wilton and Romsey, and in the year 1108 had founded the Augustinian
monastery of Holy Trinity, Aldgate. Her husband spent long
intervals, several years at a time, in Normandy, when the queen
managed the affairs of the court. 'Yet lowliness in thee tempered
thy great majesty,' says Henry of Huntingdon. She died in the
year 1118.

The example of Rahere's good bishop Richard de Belmeis or
Beauvais (fn. 15) may have influenced our founder, for he had founded the
Augustinian Abbey of St. Osyth in Essex in the year 1120.

But Sir Norman Moore suggests that the conversion may have
more likely been due to the great catastrophe of the week of the
White Ship, the Blanche Nef, which occured on the 25th November,
1120. In that great disater the heir to the throne was drowned, in
company with a brother, a half-brother and sister, and the flower
of the young nobility. The king had only sailed a few hours in
advance of the fated ship, but when the news was told him, three days
later, he fell in a swoon and so remained for several hours. Such an
event was well calculated to cause our founder to take a more serious
view of life.

Newton (fn. 16) relates a story, which he says was once current, to the
effect that when Rahere was on the Continent a great friend of his
died and at funeral the dead man was caused to rise and tell
Rahere of the inexpressible torments he was suffering in purgatory
for not having performed sufficient works of benevolence. Rahere
was so affected that he resolved to devote his future life and means
to benevolence. This story seems too good to be true!

But for whatever cause, repentace did come to Rahere, and his
biographer related how: (fn. 17)

'This man, therefore, by God's grace in time repenting of his
faults and proposing to halve his days that he might obtain full,
plenary and perfect pardon of all his sins, determined to go to the
holy Roman court, desiring in so laborious a journey to do fruits
meet for repentance. And in no way with slothful spirit putting off
for time and years this frame of mind inspired from heaven, but
constanly carrying out the good work conceived with pious longing,
he set off upon his journey and, God directing his steps, arrived
safely whither he purposed.'

Previous to Rahere's visit there had been trouble in the church
at Rome. In the year 1117 Henry V of Germany marched into the
city and Pachal, the pope, retired. In 1118 Paschal died and his
successor Gelasius II had also to fly from Rome when Burdinus,
Archbishop of Braga, was set up as anti-pope by Henry V under the
name of Gregory VIII. Gelasius died in France in January 1119.
A Frenchman, Guido, a distant relation of Henry V, succeeded as
Calixtus II; he made a progress through France and when at Gisors
on 20th November, 1119, he gave an interview to our King Henry.
After that interview and after his long sojourn in France, Henry
returned to England a few hours in advance of the White Ship, as
already described, and the pope entered Rome and the anti-pope
was suppressed. Thus, if Rahere started his pilgrimage after the
loss of the heir to the throne, he would have found Rome once more
at peace. The historian continues: (fn. 18)

'And there at the places of the martyrdoms of the most blessed
Apostles Peter and Paul, deploring his misdeeds and recalling to
memory the sins and ignorances of his youth, he prayed that
remission of them should be granted him by the Lord, promising
that he would do nothing of like nature in the future, but having
renounced these would devoutly obey His will; those two brilliant
luminaries of heaven, two men of mercy, he set as mediators
between himself and the governor of the whole earth, that he
would avoid his past follies and pay assiduous attention to his
promises.'

The place of the martyrdom of St. Peter, now occupied by the
church of S. Pietro in Montorio, is on the slope of the Janiculum in
Rome; the place of the martyrdom of St. Paul in the Campania
is now occupied by the church of S. Paolo alle Tre Fontane. It is
nearly three miles south from the Porta S. Paolo and is renowned
for being a malarious spot; we may therefore reasonably assume
that the illness contracted by Rahere, as described in the following
passage, was the malaria, known as Roman fever. His biographer
writes: (fn. 19)

'In the meantime, while he sojourned there, he began to be
vexed with a grievous sickness and, his pains gradually increasing,
he was brought to extremity. And he, fearing that he had not yet
given satisfaction to God for his misdeeds, and wondering whether
therefore to avenge his crimes the final hour of his death was upon
him among outlandish people, poured out his heart like water in
the sight of God and all breaking out into tears he vowed a vow
that if, having obtained health, it should be allowed him to return
to his own country he would erect a hospital for the restoration
of poor men and, as far as he could, would administer to the necessities of the poor gathered together in that place. And not long
after the benign and merciful Lord who saw the tears of Hezekiah, (fn. 20)
who rewarded the importunity of the woman of Canaan (fn. 21) with the
benefit of his pity, mercifully looked upon him also as he wept and
approved his vow by granting him the health that he desired. And
he gaining strength after his weakness, and having become
whole, prepared to return to his own, ready to perform the vow
he had made.' (fn. 22)

On his way home he had a vision which the writer, continuing,
thus describes: (fn. 23)

'Whilst he was accomplishing his journey, on a certain night
he saw a vision, full at once of terror and sweetness. For, when
after sweats by day he was refreshing his limbs with rest, it seemed
to him that he was borne on high by a certain beast having four
feet and two wings and that he was set by it in a very high place.
And when from such a height he bent down the glance of his eyes
to the depths, he discovered a horrible pit to be beneath him, the
terrible vision of which struck the beholder with both fear and
horror at once, for its depth baffled all human view. He, therefore,
conscious in himself of his sins, thinking that he would forthwith
fall into so vast a precipice, as it seemed to him, shuddered, and
began to give forth lusty cries from his mouth. And, as he was
thus fearful and crying aloud with fear, one was beside him, bearing
royal majesty in his countenance, of wonderful beauty and imperial
authority, and with his look fixed upon him spake good words—words of consolation, bringing a good message, as if he spoke in
these words (fn. 24)—"Oh! man," says he, "what and how much
allegiance would you pay to him who should help you in such a
mortal crisis," and when he replied thereto that he would most
diligently repay whatever heart, whatever strength were his for
the thanking of his deliverer, he continued—"I am Bartholomew,
an Apostle of Jesus Christ, who have come to help thee in thy
straits and to unlock for thee the secrets of the heavenly mystery;
for thou shalt know that I, by the will and command of all the
High Trinity, and with the common favour and counsel of the
court of heaven, have chosen a spot in a suburb of London at
Smedfeld where in my name thou shalt found a church, and there
shall be the house of God, the tabernacle of the Lamb, the temple
of the Holy Ghost. This spiritual house the Almighty Lord shall
inhabit, sanctify, glorify and preserve unspotted for ever and ever.
And his eyes shall be open (fn. 25) and his ears directed toward that house
night and day that he who asketh may receive, (fn. 26) he who seeketh
may find, and he who knocketh may enter. For every one who,
being converted and penitent, shall pray in this place, shall be
heard in heaven, or seeking with a perfect heart help from any
tribulation without doubt shall obtain it; to those who knock
with pious longing at the door of the spouse attendant angels
shall open the gates of heaven, receiving and offering to God the
prayers and vows of a faithful people. Therefore let thy hands be
strengthened, and having faith in the Lord act manfully. Nor
doubt at all with anxious mind concerning the expenses of this
building; merely apply diligence, mine it shall be to provide the
costs necessary for directing and completing the fabric of this work
and to proclaim the place itself acceptable to God and myself with
very manifest signs and tokens, and to protect thee incessantly
beneath the shadow of my wings. Of this work know that thou
art the minister and I the master. Do thou employ diligent
service; I will perform the office of master and patron." At these
words the vision disappeared.'

As to why the vision should have been in the form of St. Bartholomew nothing is said by the chronicler, so we can only conjecture.
Now before this time the bones (or the supposed bones) of St. Bartholomew had been brought from Beneventum to Rome and placed
in the ancient porphyry sarcophagus which forms the present high
altar of the church of S. Bartolommeo. This church is on the Isola
Tiberina, a small island which lies between the Ponte Garibaldi and
the Ponte Emilio. Close by, on the right bank of the river, is Trastevere,
reaching up the side of the Janiculum to the church of S. Pietro in
Montorio: it was the portion of the city which in ancient times
and in the middle ages was the Jewish quarter and where St. Paul
was lodged. Rahere, as a pilgrim, would also have been lodged there
and it would be reasonable to assume that he visited more than once
so interesting an object as the shrine of the apostle in his immediate
neighbourhood. As this church of S. Bartolommeo, founded by
Otho III about the year 1000, succeeded a temple of Aesculapius,
the god of medicine, on the same spot, it would be interesting if it
could be proved that there was this connexion between St. Bartholomew's on the Tiber and St. Bartholomew's in Smithfield.

A German historian, (fn. 27) on the authority of Leo of Ostia, asserts that
the bones of the apostle are not in the church at all, as the body of
St. Paulinus de Nola was by a pious fraud given to the emperor
Otho in place of that of St. Bartholomew. The church authorities
claim to have both bodies, the one in the high altar and the other
in the north chapel altar; and there is some corroboration of this
in the fact that both St. Paulinus and St. Bartholomew are depicted
in the great well head which stands on the chancel steps and which
is evidently coeval with the church itself.

The narrator then tells us (fn. 28) that when Rahere awoke he was in
much perplexity whether to take the vision as an ordinary illusion,
such as comes in dreams, or as a heavenly oracle, of which he felt
he was not worthy; but he eventually decided in favour of the latter
and to perform the command of the apostle. The writer then gives
instances from scripture where dreams were heaven-sent messages,
and also expounds his view of the meaning of the vision. (fn. 29) He then
continues: (fn. 30)

'Therefore, the remainder of his journey being accomplished,
he came to London, and was received with much joy by his acquaintances and friends. With whom and with some barons (fn. 31) of London
in intimate converse about these things which were revolving in
his mind, he narrated what things were done concerning him by
the way, and took counsel as to what would be meet to be done
thereon. And from them he received the answer that nothing of
what he desired could be effected by him without consulting the
king; especially because the place divinely shewn to him was
contained within the king's market, on which it was lawful neither
for the princes themselves nor for the wardens of their own authority
to encroach to any extent whatever, much less to allot it to a
religious purpose of this kind.'

We thus see that the site chosen for the priory was the king's
market. In Roman times Smithfield is known to have been the site
of one of the extensive cemeteries outside the walls of London.
This is corroborated by the fact that in the year 1877 two stone
Roman sarcophagi were found (fn. 32) on the site of the present library
of the hospital.

The Anglo-Saxons gave the place the descriptive name of Smœdfeld (Smeð), signifying the Smooth field. It would have been
seized by the Conqueror as part of the ancient demesne of Edward
the Confessor. There are frequent references in the charters to the
king's 'demesne chapel', (fn. 33) his 'demesne canons', his 'demesne
possessions' (fn. 34) when referring to the priory.

FitzStephen, (fn. 35) writing about the year 1174, describes the weekly
horse market held there on Fridays and gives a very graphic description of the horse racing held at the same time. Shakespeare refers
to it as a horse market, (fn. 36) when a page tells Falstaff that Bardolph
has 'gone into Smithfield to buy your worship a horse'. And the
vestry minute books of 1774 tell us that the horse market was still
being held and on Fridays. That Smithfield was in a very bad
condition in the twelfth century and later is evident by the fact that
Pope Celestinus III, in the year 1191, (fn. 37) made the condition of it
a reason for claiming for the hospital a cemetery separate from that
of the priory, for, says he, 'the labour of conducting funerals is very
great through the muddy streets and horse market.' Also, in the year
1320, in reply to the complaint of the brethren of the hospital and
of the community living round Smithfield, the mayor and sheriffs
were ordered to see that no wells or ditches were dug therein to the
annoyance of passengers and inhabitants without the king's licence. (fn. 38)

Before continuing the writer's narrative, it will be well to mention
here the traditions he refers to in the next chapter regarding the site,
where he says: (fn. 39)

'By the relation of our elders we find this place divinely shewn
as a place of prayer . . . to the glorious King Edward the Confessor
. . . when, as the book of his deeds says, he was conspicuous as a
religious . . . and being illumined by the Holy Spirit he looked with
the eyes of his mind upon things remote as being present and future
things as existing. On a certain night, while his eyes were taking
sleep, but his heart awake to God, he was forewarned of this place
by a divine oracle given to him that God had chosen to place His
Name there and to shew it renowned and venerable to Christian
people. Whereupon this most holy king, rising in the morning,
came to the place which God had shewn him, and to those standing
by explained the vision made to him at night, and foretold that
that place should be great before God and all people.'

'It was said also that three men from Greece, sprung of noble
lineage, having gone forth from their country and kindred and
having entered for the Lord's sake upon the labour of a holy
pilgrimage, when with devout souls they had often besought the
protection of saints in many places in the world as they travelled
round . . . coming to London approached this place and there,
prostrate on the ground, worshipped God, and in the face of those
who were present and who were regarding them as simple and
ignorant folk, began to prophesy wonderful things of this place,
saying—"Wonder not ye that we here worship God where the
Supreme Creator of all things will build a temple most pleasing
to Himself, and its fame shall reach from the rising of the sun to
the going down thereof".' (fn. 41)

Returning to the account of how the site was obtained, the writer
says: (fn. 42)

'And, using the counsel of his friends, he betook himself to
the king at an opportune time, and in the presence of Bishop
Richard, whom he had won over to himself as a supporter, he
effectually explained his business and humbly besought to be
allowed to bring his purpose to performance. Forthwith He, in
whose hand he was, inclined the king's heart to his desire, for
prayers could not be ineffective whose author was the apostle and
whose hearer was God. So that saying was pleasing in the eyes
of the king and, considering the man's wish to be very good, and
as he was of a prudent heart and mind, he bestowed his royal
favour upon his petitioner and graciously gave him authority to
carry out his proposals.'

It is difficult to suggest a date for this audience granted by the
king, for in the spring of 1121 he went to the Continent again to
bring over his newly betrothed bride, Adelicia of Louvaine. He was
married in January 1122, and a few weeks after he had to leave
home again to suppress the outbreak of the Welsh, and in April 1123
he sailed for Normandy to quell the revolt of the baronage. But it
is interesting to see the ready access to the king possible in those
days, and also to see the presence of the bishop, whose consent to the
founding of the church was a necessity.

The writer then expressly states that Rahere obtained from the
king the title of the possession he desired—a regia maiestate titulum
optatae possessionis nactus. (fn. 43)

In what form the title was given we do not know: it may have
been by deed of feoffment (deed of grant) and livery of seisin (delivery
of possession) or by livery of seisin without a deed. If the former
method, we should have expected to find, if not a copy, at any rate
a reference to it or a confirmation of it in subsequent charters; instead
of which, although many refer to the grant none refers to a deed of
grant. Thus, some time before the year 1170, Thomas of Canterbury,
in his charter, states that 'Henry I granted the site in frankalmoign
and by his charter confirmed it'; Henry II, in his charter of 1173,
says that his grandfather 'granted in right of his crown the place in
Smethefeld'; Richard I in his charter of 1190 confirms 'the gift of
King Henry, our great grandsire, the place of Smethefeld in which
their church was founded and the hospital house of the same church';
and in his charter of 1253 Henry III says that Henry I 'gave the
place in Smethefelde'. Henry I, in his own charter of 1133, moreover,
confirmed to the church all the lands pertaining to it, but he does not
confirm any previous deed of grant. He does, however, later on
make provision for any grant made other than by deed, for briefly
he says: 'whatsoever shall be remembered to have been justly
granted by writing or by testimony of good men (fn. 44) let no person
presume to take.'

For these reasons we incline to the opinion that the feoffment was
not by deed and livery of seisin, but by livery of seisin only, and this
in spite of the fact that feoffments by deed were already being
made in the reign of the first Henry. 'Feoffment by livery of seisin'
only was made by the feoffer to the feoffee (the grantor to the grantee)
in person, in presence of witnesses, the feoffer taking a clod of earth
or a twig of a tree, or something on the land to be conveyed, and
handing it to the feoffee, using, usually, a form of words of conveyance.
That the king really was the grantor of the land both for the priory
and for the hospital, is, as the biographer states, abundantly proved
by the above charters. He writes: (fn. 45)

'And he, having obtained of the king's majesty the title of the
possession he desired, and omitting no care or diligence, very gladly
began to carry out his double work of piety: one for the vow which
he had made; the other as had been appointed him by precept.
When, therefore, matters succeeded prosperously and all things
that were necessary flowed to his hand, according to the apostle's
word, he forthwith began to build the church with suitable stone
blocks in courses and the hospital house a little further removed
from the church.'

The above makes it quite clear that the priory and the hospital
were commenced at one and the same time.

'Now the church was founded, as we have received of our elders,
in the month of March, in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ, in
memory of the most blessed apostle Bartholomew, in the one
thousand one hundred and twenty-third year from the Incarnation
of the same Lord our Saviour, while the most holy Pope Calixtus
the Second (fn. 47) ruled the holy see of Rome; William, Archbishop of
Canterbury, (fn. 48) presided over the Church of England; and Richard (fn. 49)
was bishop of London, who of due right hallowed that place on
the east side of the said field, and dedicated with episcopal authority
what was at that time quite a small cemetery (breve tunc admodum
cemeterium) in the reign of the younger son of William Nothi
(the Bastard) (fn. 50) first king of the English in the north, Henry the
first, in the thirtieth and about a third year of his reign, (fn. 51) to the
praise and glory of the Most High and Undivided Trinity, to
Whom be blessing and thanksgiving, honour and dominion for
ever and ever. Amen.'

This passage, important as regards dates, is unfortunately obscure
towards the end.

After a founder had made his application to the bishop of the
diocese, the bishop set up a cross and set out the ground where the
church was to be built, and then the founder might proceed with
the building: when finished the bishop was to consecrate it, before
which the sacraments were not to be administered therein. (fn. 52) This
setting up of the cross around which the building was to rise was
the ceremony of founding, and still is so in the Roman church, where
the cross is afterwards kept as a memorial of the occasion.

The Emperor Justinian, in his form for this ceremony of founding,
prescribed that 'none shall presume to erect a church until the
bishop of the diocese hath been first acquainted therewith, and shall
come and lift up his hands to heaven, and consecrate the place to
God by prayer and erect the symbol of our salvation, the venerable
and truly precious rood', (fn. 53) so that the words 'who of due right
hallowed that place on the east side of the said field and dedicated
with episcopal authority' describes the ceremony as having been
carried out in the correct form. The next four words, breve tunc
admodum cemeterium, present some difficulty, but the obvious meaning
is that a portion of the site was consecrated as a small cemetery.

The date of the founding is given very precisely as in the month
of March milesimo centesimo vigesimo tertio—so clearly that one
wonders why of all the chroniclers only Matthew Paris and Matthew
of Westminster should give the date correctly, and why J. H. Parker
in his lecture in 1863 should have suggested that 1123 was the date
of completion and not of the founding of the church.

The dates of Pope Calixtus, of the Archbishop of Canterbury and
of the Bishop of London all agree with the above date, but the way
the regnal year of the king is stated: Regnante . . . Henrico primo
Anno XXX et circiter tercium regni eius is impossible and shows the
text to be corrupt. The 'thirtieth and about a third' of King Henry's
reign would be December 1129, with which the other dates would
not agree. The most plausible explanation is that the scribe when
making the transcript in the fourteenth century wrote XXX instead
of XX and certiter (or tirtiter) tertium in an effort to extend an original
tertio: errors of this nature (termed dittography) occur in all transcripts, and this is a fourteenth-century transcript of a twelfth-century
original. The year would then read the 23rd of Henry I, which was
1123, the date given for the founding.

It is unfortunate that the consecration of the church when built
is not recorded in the Book of the Foundation, because it must have
taken place. The consecration was a solemnity celebrated with the
greatest pomp, especially in the Church of England, (fn. 54) and the king
in his charter, when granting freedom from all earthly service,
especially excepted 'episcopal customs as consecration of the church'.

The same applies to the dedication of the church: this, too, was
a great ceremony, on the eve of which the relics of saints were brought
to the church and watched throughout the night, with a blaze of
lighted candles and hymn singing, and on the day of dedication they
would have been laid with due honour in their proper places. (fn. 55) The
dedication mentioned in the MS. evidently referred to the site of the
church only and to the small cemetery.

It would seem, therefore:

That the church was founded in the year 1123.

That when the building was completed to a point sufficient for
consecration the convent assembled, but in what year (fn. 56) there
is no reliable record; probably about 1126, or 1127.

That the sedition, to be described presently, began to foment in
the year 1130 or 1131; and

That the resulting conspiracy to take Rahere's life led to the
granting by the king of an important charter of privileges in
1133.

The passage quoted above relating to the founding refers to the
fact that the church was finished 'in memory of the most blessed
apostle Bartholomew', and, seeing that the church was built by the
precept of that apostle, as shown in the vision, it is natural to attribute
the dedication to that event. But St. Bartholomew had long been
held in esteem in England: in the time of King Cnut, the Bishop of
Benevento brought the bones of one arm of the saint to England,
which were purchased by Emma, Cnut's Queen, (fn. 57) and presented to
the monks of Christ Church, Canterbury, by the king by charter,
together with the king's great pall, the golden crown of his head and
the port of Sandwich, (fn. 58) thereby showing in what great veneration this
relic was held. It is not, therefore, surprising to find, in the adjoining
diocese of Rochester, a hospital of St. Bartholomew, founded before
that of Rahere, by Gundulph, Bishop of Rochester, (fn. 59) about the end
of the eleventh century, for the use of lepers. It lies partly in
Rochester and partly in Chatham; it escaped the general suppression
by Henry VIII, and still survives. There is also a hospital of St. Bartholomew at Sandwich, founded in the year 1190, (fn. 60) which now supports
sixteen brethren and sisters.

St. Bartholomew was always considered the patron not only of
the priory but also of the hospital and of the fair, and he is constantly
referred to as such by our chronicler. All the cases of healing at the
church are attributed to the patron; when Rahere had his antiphonar
stolen it was St. Bartholomew who directed him how to find it;
when men were saved from shipwreck (and there are six such cases
recorded) it was through the intervention of the patron. When
sailors were thus saved they would bring their offerings to St. Bartholomew's church, in money or in kind; (fn. 61) on one occasion it took
the form of a model in silver of the ship that was saved. (fn. 62) No doubt
the offerings of seamen considerably swelled the oblations of the altar
of the church. The legend on the priory seal of the fourteenth century
shows the position the apostle held in the minds of Rahere's successors—'Credimus ante Deum proveni per Bartholomeum' (we believe we
are brought into the presence of God by Bartholomew).

The orientation of the church would probably have been arranged
at the time of the founding ceremony, or preparatory thereto. On
what day in March this took place is not mentioned, but assuming
it to have been on Lady Day, the sun, we are told, would have risen
on that day (old style) in London, in the year 1123, at 6.6° north
of east (83.4° E. of N.). But it has been shown by observations,
especially taken for this book, that the angle of orientation of the
church is 37.76° north of east (52.24° E. of N.—true north, not
magnetic north), (fn. 63) so that either the orientation of the church was
governed by some other consideration than the point at which the
sun rose on the day of the founding, or else the orientation was not
arranged in the month of March, but at some time in the summer
when the point of the sun's rising would have more nearly coincided
with the angle of orientation; that is to say, about May 27th or
July 4th, at either of which times, we are told, (fn. 64) the sun would have
risen in London, in the year 1123, 37.76° east of north.

Turning again to the Book of the Foundation, the writer tells us
of the cleansing of the site. (fn. 65)

'Now that place, however, before its cleansing, holding forth
no hope of offering anything good, was very foul and, like a marsh,
at almost all times abounded with filth and muddy water. And
the part which was above the water was allotted to the hanging
of thieves and the punishment of others who had been condemned
by judicial authority.'

Stow and other historians speak of the ground being moorish and
fenny, but the soil is really a deep layer of fine river gravel on which,
as a matter of fact, Rahere built without any other foundation: the
condition described above would be applicable to any undrained
market-place. It is to be noted that the gallows originally stood
on the site of the present church, a fact which does not seem to be
generally known.

From this site the gallows were removed to the Elms on the other
side of Smithfield by the then Horse-pool, due west from St. Bartholomew's; a site now covered by the western portion of the main block
of buildings of the Central Meat Market.

The writer continues:

'When, however, Rahere had devoted his energies to the purging
of the place and had decided to put his hand to the sacred building,
not being ignorant of the wiles of Satan, he made himself a fool
because he was constrained to do so (quia coactus) and outwardly
putting on the appearance of a simpleton he began for a time to
hide the secret of his soul, and to do his work more wisely, the more
he did it secretly. At length, with wonderful skill in games, he
won to himself bands of children and servants, and by their help
he easily began to collect together stones and other things which
should be profitable for his building. And he himself played with
them and became in his own eyes even more vile from day to day,
in order only that he might so much please the apostle of Christ,
to whom he approved himself. And helped by his grace, when
those things that seemed necessary had been prepared, he raised
up an immense fabric; and now he began openly to be and to be
called not foolish as was being thought but truly wise as was being
concealed.'

As the stone with which the church was built came from a long
distance, we assume that these serving men and boys merely helped
in unloading the various building materials and carrying them to the
place required, as was done in Normandy, where the people harnessed
themselves to the carts laden with building materials and provisions
for the workmen. (fn. 66)

The narrative continues:

'From this time all men were greatly astonished both at the
novelty of the rising fabric and at the founder of this new work.
For who would believe that that place could be purged with so
sudden a cleansing and the tokens of the adorable cross be raised
there [probably alluding to the cross or rood erected at the founding
ceremony] where a short time ago were standing the horrible
gibbets of thieves? Who would not be astonished that a remarkable
building of piety should there be built to be a safe sanctuary to
those that fled thereto, where of old was fixed the common place (fn. 67)
of the condemned and where the general punishment of the wretched
had been inflicted? Who would not marvel that there should be
vaunted there the mystery of the Lord's Body and Holy Blood,
where formerly was poured the blood of guilty men? Whose
heart would easily admit that a man of such kind, neither remarkable by gentility of proud blood, nor sufficiently endowed with
knowledge of letters human or divine, should undertake so prudently, so excellent and magnificent a work, and having undertaken
it, should carry it on from day to day with such happy progress?
This is the change of the hand of the Highest. These are Thy works,
O Christ! . . . who madest Golgotha—a place of public abomination—a sanctuary of prayer, and a solemn token of devotion.'

Those who rebuilt the founder's tomb at the end of the fourteenth
century, when they caused the book to be translated, must have been
reminded by the above of the passages from Isaiah which they inscribed in Latin on the open Bibles in the hands of the two Augustinian
canons kneeling at Rahere's feet: (fn. 68) 'For the Lord shall comfort
Zion: He will comfort all her waste places: and He will make her
wilderness like Eden, and her desert like the garden of the Lord;
joy and gladness shall be found therein, thanksgiving and the voice
of melody', and (fn. 69) 'The wilderness and the solitary place shall be glad
for them; and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose'.

It was probably about this time, before the building was finished,
that Rahere obtained the assistance of Alfune, as recorded in the
following passage from the twenty-second chapter: (fn. 70)

'When the plantation which the heavenly Father had planted,
to wit the aforesaid church, rose higher, and the fame of the virtue
of the apostle rose higher, Rahere joined to himself a certain old
man, Alfune by name, in whom there seemed to be seriousness with
age, and, with seriousness, the wisdom of age. The same old man,
not long before [about the year 1090], (fn. 71) had built the church of
St. Giles at the gate of the city which is called in the English
tongue Crepallsgate but in Latin Porta Contractorum, and had
brought that good work to a happy conclusion. Thinking that
this man would be useful to him, he appointed him his colleague,
and with his counsel and help arranged and perfected what was
to be done. It was the custom of the said Alfune to go about the
city and neighbourhood of the church with an officer of the church,
and busily to seek necessaries for the relief of the poor who lay in
the hospital, and of those who were hired for the sake of building
the church.'

If Alfune was, say, forty years of age when he finished St. Giles's
church, he would have been between seventy-five and eighty when
he came to help Rahere.

'So, as time went on, the clerks who were to live under regular
rule were shortly brought together in that place, Rahere holding
the office of prior and abundantly ministering to them necessaries,
not indeed from fixed revenues but from the offerings of the faithful.
And not long after, lo, the fear he feared befel him, and what he
dreaded happened to him: to some he became the savour of life
unto life, to others the savour of death unto death. (fn. 73) For some
said "he is a deceiver", because in the net of the great fisherman
evil fish are mixed with good until the hour of the last judgment;
those of his household became his foes and there arose against him
wicked men: but their wickedness deceived themselves. Therefore,
stimulated by envy, some secretly, many even openly, ceased not
to rage against the man of God, and to disparage the place itself
and the prelate thereof, to bring calumnious charges, to terrify
with threats, to take away what goods they could, to oppress with
baseness, to weary with wrong, to provoke with abuse and to beset
with feigned friendship. Some of them broke out into such bold
madness and mad boldness that they entered into an alliance of
wicked conspiracy among themselves as to on which set day and
place they might deceive him with guile and subtlety and admit
to their counsel the man of God, and when present might take him
by stealth from the path of life and thus altogether destroy his
memory from the earth. But there is no wisdom, no knowledge,
no device (fn. 74) against the Lord on Whom he was casting his thought,
and in Whom, with the help of his apostle, he put his strength. . . .
So He, Who was his hope, became his Strength and for his sake
overcame his foes. Meantime, while the day appointed for the
destruction of the innocent is awaited, one of them who was a
partaker in this great treason, and in his guilt shuddering at the
unheard-of sin, before the hour of the impending danger, fully
disclosed to the servant of God the substance of the whole plan.
He thereupon gave thanks to God and to his patron that the
secrets of his foes were not hid from him and, by help of his piety,
he had escaped the death prepared for him.

'For these and similar reasons that came to light, again he
approached the king and with lamentable complaint urged how
with false reproaches he was disgraced, and how the outbreak of
scorn tried him; and prayed that he would deign to protect his
person and the place appointed him by royal bounty. He also
suggested to the king that he could look for no reward of God who
began a good work and did not bring what he had begun to its
proper completion. Wherefore by the bowels of Christ's pity on
which he trusted, by the might of his dignity, by the eminence of
his power, let him open to the desolate his heart of pity, let him
honour God in his servants, let him restrain the yelping madness
of the faithless and thus, combining better issues with good beginnings, build for himself an eternal mansion in heaven, while he
respected the house of God on earth.

'And so the king, marvelling at the man's prudence and constancy, answered that he granted his just and necessary petitions
and pledged himself to be thenceforward the guardian and defender
of him and his. Therefore he presented the church, and all things
belonging thereto, with the same liberties with which his crown and
the freest Church of England were possessed, and granted to it the
customary rights; and he decreed that it should be free from all
earthly service, jurisdiction and submission, and gave very sharp
sentence against the conspirators. These and many other tokens
of liberties he granted to the prior and to those serving under him
and to the aforesaid church, and confirmed them by his charter
under a seal, adjuring also all his heirs and successors in the name
of the Holy Trinity that they should uphold and defend this place
with their royal authority, and should grant and confirm the
liberties granted by him.

'Fortified with such privileges he joyfully came out from before
the face of the king; and coming to his own people he made known
what he had obtained of the king's majesty, to some that they
might rejoice with him, to others that they might be afeared.'

31. At this time the aldermen and chief citizens were thus styled, and the obverse
of the common seal of the City, c. 1225, still in use, has the legend sigillum baronum
Londoniarum; see also Riley, Memorials, 37.